SIL marrying a pedophile RESOLUTION Post 209 - Page 6

[Arduinna]

Originally Posted by Jeannine 
Also, prosecutors commonly encourage people to plead guilty to a lesser charge (even when the person insists they're innocent), by talking up their case as though there's no chance the person will "get off" if they go to trial.  That tactic on the part of the prosecutor can be absolutely terrifying. 

 if you plead guilty to child sexual abuse you better expect that normal mentally healthy people are not going to give you access to their children. Period. You aren't even allowed within X distance from schools or places children congregate. I'd be extremely surprised if he is even legally allowed to live in the same home with children. So that right there is a HUGE red flag. We have no evidence to assume that OPs SIL lied when she told him she didn't know. In fact it's much more likely if she did know she would have said so. All she did was make herself look even worse for moving in with him after being told of his conviction.

[MusicianDad]

Originally Posted by kama'aina mama 

I am shocked and saddened that a number of people are convinced that men are convicted of abusing children on little or no evidence "all the time."  I think that if you had ever had any actual experience with the criminal justice system, around this issue in particular, you would not believe that.  It is very difficult to get a conviction in cases of this nature.  This contention that "bitter ex-wives" are throwing men in prison in droves, just on their word, is offensive and dangerous.

This is one of the issues where personal bias plays a huge role in whether or not someone get a conviction or evidence... The wrong persecutor, or the wrong CPS worker, or the wrong jurists and the person being accused is guaranteed a conviction whether the evidence is enough to support it or not. Just like the wrong people involved in the whole thing can get a defendant off when there is enough evidence to support it.

The reason it is difficult to get a conviction is the same reason there are plenty of people who get wrongly convicted. Most of the evidence involved ends up being circumstantial or witness testimony rather than something that is undeniable proof of guilt or innocence. 

[laohaire]

Of all the people I know were molested as children or raped in general, none of their perpetrators were brought to justice in any way, shape or form.

My high school best friend, molested or raped by her father - nobody ever believed her and her father, a prominent and well-respected physician, is happily living his life with not a single charge or even question brought against him. My friend did not survive this, she took her own life at age 22 after a lifetime of everyone pinning it on her (she was "crazy").

My mother (and, I assume, my aunt), molested as small children in the foster care system - zip, zilch, nada.

My mother's (adopted) cousin, molested by her father - when she tried to come out about this, her mother chose her husband over her and the family cut the cousin off rather than deal with it. No criminal charges were pursued by the cousin, of course.

My friend's boyfriend's sister, raped by another brother - nothing. Zip. The rapist is a sociopath and is just about to get out of jail for arson. Never served a second for rape. The mother is having a little "welcome back from jail" family get-together soon, and the sister is "expected" to come. My friend and her boyfriend are refusing to attend.

Another friend, raped as a teenager. Nothing came of it.

Same friend, her mother was molested by her brother. Her grandmother has cut her mother off for talking about it. Criminal charges, not even a chance.

I'm utterly disturbed at the number of examples I am coming up with. I don't work with abused kids or anything, I'm just talking about people I know. Oh, just thought of another one: DH went to elementary school with a sociopath. His sister apparently had tried to tell several people that the sociopath was molesting or raping her as well as beating her and everything else. Nothing came of it until he killed her. I'm just DISTURBED.

And what we're worried about is that this guy probably didn't do anything??????????????????

I. Don't. Freaking. Care.

I mean, someone said they'd believe someone was a murderer if they were caught standing over the body with a bloody knife. But you know, I'm sure some guy in the history of the world was caught in just that position and was innocent. So, what, we have to worry about that guy and figure that everybody else who was killed was just making it up?

It's funny, I don't think people are so hedgy about other convictions. If you hear your new neighbor has a drug conviction, is the first thing you think "oh, there has to be more to the story"?

Sex abuse is COMMON. It's probably more common than drug abuse!!!!!!!!!!! I can see a bunch of people shaking their heads, but seriously. We don't talk about it. We hide it. We say "oh, there must be more to the story." And that's why we're deluded.

[Shantimama]

 Well that is the problem with crimes like this. Most child molesters find a private place where there are no witnesses or cameras and they choose victims who are not likely to be believed if they even do tell anyone. They go to great lengths to ensure their victims never report them and to do all they can to make sure they won't be believed if they do tell.

My dh works in a profession where he has to be aware of not putting himself in a position where he could be falsely accused of sexual misconduct. I am well aware of the vulnerablity of some situations for men. That said, there are huge numbers of child abusers who get away with their crimes. Those who never get reported never get convicted. Those who are not believed by the parents, teachers, etc the children choose to tell - those abusers never get convicted. The court system is horrific for victims and many do not go through with accusing. Because there is of often no "proof" the abuser often goes free. There are many types of sexual violence that leave no evidence behind, especially if there is any kind of delay in reporting what happened. A simple bath or bedtime toothbrushing can wash away any evidence and at that point it is the word of an adult against a child. If the child has been told no one will believe them or something terrible will happen if they tell, then it remains a secret and the criminal walks free. The motivation of a sex offender to lie and pass as innocent is much greater than the motivation of a child to lie and expose themselves to the stress and shame of being questioned and examined for lying about sexual abuse.

It is far easier for a sexual criminal to walk free than for someone who is innocent to be tried and convicted of a sexual crime.

I have to wonder about the people who are saying we should give this poor guy the benefit of the doubt. Would you be saying the same thing if this was someone joining your family or having regular, easy access to children you love and care about?

[kama'aina mama]

Originally Posted by MusicianDad 

This is one of the issues where personal bias plays a huge role in whether or not someone get a conviction or evidence... The wrong persecutor, or the wrong CPS worker, or the wrong jurists and the person being accused is guaranteed a conviction whether the evidence is enough to support it or not. Just like the wrong people involved in the whole thing can get a defendant off when there is enough evidence to support it.

The reason it is difficult to get a conviction is the same reason there are plenty of people who get wrongly convicted. Most of the evidence involved ends up being circumstantial or witness testimony rather than something that is undeniable proof of guilt or innocence. 

I don't believe that the bolded is remotely true.

[MusicianDad]

It doesn't mean it rarely or never happens though. Ask Steven Truscott... It took over 40 years for him to be acquitted of rape and murder

[GuildJenn]

Originally Posted by Jeannine 

On the other hand, there are people who do, indeed, molest children!  So, shouldn't women err on the side of caution and steer clear of any guy who's accused, much less convicted?  You certainly can't blame any woman who chooses that path.  Honestly?  It's the path I would choose.  But, it's tragic to think that a bitter ex-wife might render a man "untouchable" by falsely accusing him of molesting their child.  Not only does he endure the Hell of prosecution, but he's doomed to be alone forever?  

I think it's pretty simple: He may well be doomed not to live with a woman and her young children. There is nothing wrong with dating and loving each other but not integrating homes until the kids are older or out of the house, or dating only people without children.

I'm sorry but I don't see that as particularly tragic. Sad maybe, but not tragic. 

[Shantimama]

 The down side of the justice system when it comes to sexual crimes is that by saying those who are accused are to be considered innocent until proven guilty, it is implies that the person making the accusation is considered to be lying until proven innocent. The victim has to prove that it did happen rather than the accused proving it did not happen.

[kama'aina mama]

Originally Posted by MusicianDad 

It doesn't mean it rarely or never happens though. Ask Steven Truscott... It took over 40 years for him to be acquitted of rape and murder

How, exactly, does what happened to Mr Truscott proof that "The wrong persecutor, or the wrong CPS worker, or the wrong jurists and the person being accused is guaranteed a conviction whether the evidence is enough to support it or not."???  Which one wrong person was responsible for that miscarriage of justice?  And more to the point of our current conversation, do you have anything that happened within the last 50 years we could discuss, to support this contention that men are routinely railroaded into prison on utterly unfounded charges?

[NikonMama]

Originally Posted by scottishmommy 

There may be more to the story than you know. I have a dear friend who was tangled up in a vicious family feud and was falsely accused of molesting a child by his vindictive aunt. His mother and aunt had been in a bitter dispute for years and he was a victim of their squabble. He ended up pleading no contest and got 13 months or so in prison. He was terrified of facing a trial, and was advised by his lawyer to just take a plea bargain for less potential time in jail. Anyway, he's out now and has been well supported by our community. Honestly that whole situation has made me wary of child molestation charges, especially when they involve estranged ex wives etc. I'm sure that there are a lot of true pedophiles out there, but there are a lot of falsely accused men as well. Many of them are so blindsided that they simply cooperate in order to avoid life in prison. Also, at least for my friend, his parole is up, so he's allowed to go to church and be near children etc.
Of course your future BIL could be the real deal, and obviously I wouldn't leave my kids with him. But for now I wouldn't stir up trouble, at least until you know the whole story.

The exact same thing happened to DH's uncle.  He was accused and charged with 1st degree sexual assault of a minor child when he was 18 years old.  He plead no contest and got out on work release after only a short period.  Their family was crazy and it was like this poster said, people were mad at him so he was accused.  Still to this day (that was back in the 80's) he swears that he didn't do it.  I think he is a really nice guy and have no problem being around him or having my son around him.  Everyone is different, though.
 

[FoxintheSnow]

OP: If I were you, I would be doing everything in my power to get those children out of that house. Call the local police dept, cps, every family member you know. Whatever it takes. I would not be giving a CONVICTED sex offender the benefit of the doubt. No way in hell.

[kama'aina mama]

Originally Posted by NikonMama 

The exact same thing happened to DH's uncle.  He was accused and charged with 1st degree sexual assault of a minor child when he was 18 years old.  He plead no contest and got out on work release after only a short period.  Their family was crazy and it was like this poster said, people were mad at him so he was accused.  Still to this day (that was back in the 80's) he swears that he didn't do it.  I think he is a really nice guy and have no problem being around him or having my son around him.  Everyone is different, though.
 

Have you ever spoken to the child in question?
 

[Storm Bride]

I guess I don't understand giving the guy the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he was wrongly convicted. (I'm sure it does happen. I'm equally sure it doesn't happen "all the time".) So what? If he took a plea bargain, then he had to know that this was going to affect his future. If, by some chance, he isn't actually pedophile, then I guess he should still be trying to find women who don't happen to live with minors. There are lots of women out there who have no children at all, or only grown children. The fact is that he's been convicted of sexual assault of a minor (and we're not talking about some iffy kind of "she's close to the age of consent, and post-pubescent, and it was mutual" thing - this ia eight year old). He's a registered sex offender for that crime. IMO, any woman who would move this guy into her home, with her children, is not thinking straight and has seriously effed up priorities.

[MusicianDad]

Originally Posted by kama'aina mama 

How, exactly, does what happened to Mr Truscott proof that "The wrong persecutor, or the wrong CPS worker, or the wrong jurists and the person being accused is guaranteed a conviction whether the evidence is enough to support it or not."???  Which one wrong person was responsible for that miscarriage of justice?  And more to the point of our current conversation, do you have anything that happened within the last 50 years we could discuss, to support this contention that men are routinely railroaded into prison on utterly unfounded charges?

I picked Mr. Truscott because he was the first name that came to mind. It has happened in this past 50 year, I don't doubt that. As for who? The police were probably the biggest players since they were the ones that got in in their head he was guilty before they finished talking to everyone and ignore three people would could put Mr. Truscott else where at the time of the murder.

You want cases of false allegations that turned into false convictions from the last ten years? Google "Day care sex abuse hysteria" and see what you can find. Plenty of people got wrongfully convicted during the 80's and 90's because of it.

The fact that criminals get off is no reason to down play the seriousness of the wrong person being convicted. The wrong person going to jail does not help anyone, not the victim, not the system, not the accused. The only person who benefits, when the crime is real, is the person who committed it, who no longer has to worry about facing jail time for it because someone else is already there in their place.

[Super~Single~Mama]

Originally Posted by Jeannine 

But, did your sister really not know?  Is it possible she's discussed this with her fiance ad nauseum, but didn't feel comfortable telling anyone else, so she feigned surprise when you brought it up?  Also, like I said, my DH is an unusual person.  I can see why other men - if they have been falsely accused - might think the only way to have a relationship afterward would be to keep quiet about it.  I think that's a bad approach, but it doesn't necessarily mean they were guilty.

Well, this is just me, but I do not want to have anything at all to do with ANYONE who hangs out with me and my ds and fails to mention a little thing like being convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child.

And really, the first thing I'm doing when I find out, is RUNNING the other way.  Because my DS deserves to be kept safe.  I don't much care if he's innocent or not, b/c its not my job to sort that out or fix it. 

I really don't think your DH is "unusual" - I think he's "Responsible", and there is a HUGE difference between those 2 things.  I'm pretty sure if your DH was on Parole when he met you he would have told you, and if one of the conditions was that he couldn't be around children, he would have told you that too, and made sure NOT to be around your two LO's (I know your kids are teens now, but I don't know how old they were when you met your DH)

[Annie Mac]

Question, kind of related to the OP's situation, but really a spin-off: if a convicted molester is not supposed to have contact with kids, are there any restrictions on them if they proceed to have their own children? Do they face the same kind of sanctions with their own post-conviction children?

ETA: Oh, and there has been mention of contacting the parole officer. How does one discover who this parole officer is, and where to get in touch with them? If they are no longer under the supervision of a parole officer, does that mean they're completely off the hook for their previous crimes? Ie, there is no one to appeal to until (and if) they offend again?

[A&A]

Originally Posted by kama'aina mama 

I am shocked and saddened that a number of people are convinced that men are convicted of abusing children on little or no evidence "all the time."  I think that if you had ever had any actual experience with the criminal justice system, around this issue in particular, you would not believe that.  It is very difficult to get a conviction in cases of this nature.  This contention that "bitter ex-wives" are throwing men in prison in droves, just on their word, is offensive and dangerous.

Exactly.  My vindictive ex-SIL tried this type of allegation against my brother, but the judge threw it out.  There was just no evidence. 

[MusicianDad]

Originally Posted by Annie Mac 

Question, kind of related to the OP's situation, but really a spin-off: if a convicted molester is not supposed to have contact with kids, are there any restrictions on them if they proceed to have their own children? Do they face the same kind of sanctions with their own post-conviction children?

ETA: Oh, and there has been mention of contacting the parole officer. How does one discover who this parole officer is, and where to get in touch with them? If they are no longer under the supervision of a parole officer, does that mean they're completely off the hook for their previous crimes? Ie, there is no one to appeal to until (and if) they offend again?

I don't know about your first question, but to your second. they are not completely off the hook for their previous crimes. If they commit the same type of crime again, it will be taken into consideration by the court in many jurisdictions. It is also take into consideration in the event of a complaint against them. So if someone has been convicted of aggravated sexual abuse of a minor, and you suspect they are doing the same thing again to a stepchild, when you contact the police they will most likely take into consideration the fact that this person already has that on their record.

Theoretically that is. It's not going to happen in every case.

Though someone with a previous sexual offence on their record would have a considerably more difficult time finding a job, even if the job doesn't directly relate to children or the demographic they targeted (if it's not children).

[SuburbanHippie]

Originally Posted by MusicianDad 

That's different from being unregistered though. Being unregistered means not registered at all, under any address.

That is false information. There is no leeway because he WAS registered at a former address.  If you don't update your address, you are unregistered.  Point blank.

OP, if it has been more than 10 days since his move, you need to contact his parole officer and/or the police to make sure he did in fact change his address.  They also need to know that he will be living with minors because there is a good possibility that he is not allowed to.  This shouldn't be a "wait and see" type of thing.  Those kids need you to speak up for them.

[kama'aina mama]

Originally Posted by MusicianDad 

I picked Mr. Truscott because he was the first name that came to mind. It has happened in this past 50 year, I don't doubt that. As for who? The police were probably the biggest players since they were the ones that got in in their head he was guilty before they finished talking to everyone and ignore three people would could put Mr. Truscott else where at the time of the murder.

You want cases of false allegations that turned into false convictions from the last ten years? Google "Day care sex abuse hysteria" and see what you can find. Plenty of people got wrongfully convicted during the 80's and 90's because of it.

The fact that criminals get off is no reason to down play the seriousness of the wrong person being convicted. The wrong person going to jail does not help anyone, not the victim, not the system, not the accused. The only person who benefits, when the crime is real, is the person who committed it, who no longer has to worry about facing jail time for it because someone else is already there in their place.

What EXACTLY are you getting at?  I am certain I never said that no one was ever falsely accused or falsely convicted... but what do those cases, ones where there was a huge public awareness and hysteria, and all of which happened in the 80's or early 90's, and the outcomes of which have done much to inform the way allegations of child sexual abuse are handled now... what do any of those cases of to do with a conviction in 2002 of charges against a single victim?